District of Massachusetts • 1:25-cv-13345

#1

Nov 09, 2025

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11348331 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Adryan Samuel Ferreira Lopes. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Category Form)(Cerretani, Gabriela) (Entered: 11/09/2025)

#2

Nov 09, 2025

Judge Allison D. Burroughs: EMERGENCY ORDER CONCERNING STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL(RN) (Entered: 11/09/2025)

#3

Nov 10, 2025

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Donald L. Cabell. (SEC) (Entered: 11/10/2025)

#4

Nov 10, 2025

Service Order-2241 Petition

Nov 10, 2025

Notice of Case Assignment

#5

Nov 18, 2025

General Order 19-02

#6

Nov 18, 2025

Notice of Appearance

#7

Nov 24, 2025

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

#8

Dec 05, 2025

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re 1 Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241). Having reviewed the petition for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the "Petition") filed by Petitioner Adryan Samuel Ferreira Lopes ("Petitioner"), D. 1, and Respondents' response to same, D. 7, the Court ALLOWS the Petition insofar as it sought a bond hearing/individualized custody redetermination before an immigration judge under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial.Factual Background. Petitioner is a noncitizen from Brazil currently detained at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") Boston Field Office in Burlington, Massachusetts. D. 1 ¶¶ 1, 9, 16. Petitioner entered the United States without inspection in 2023. Id. ¶¶ 1, 16. Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") agents subsequently apprehended Petitioner and released him from custody. See id. Since approximately July 9, 2025, Petitioner's removal proceedings have been pending. See id. ¶¶ 1, 17, 23. Petitioner also has an application for asylum. Id. ¶ 17. On November 9, 2025, Petitioner was detained by ICE. Id. ¶¶ 2, 18. Petitioner alleges that his detention is not authorized under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b), and that his custody is properly governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). Id. ¶¶ 3-4, 18, 23-24, 27, 35. Petitioner contends that his detention without a bond hearing is, therefore, unlawful, including because it violates his rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, id. ¶¶ 22-26, and is contrary to statute, id. ¶¶ 27-36. He seeks a bond hearing. Id. ¶ 6.Discussion. The Petition challenges Petitioner's detention in this district and seeks relief from same. Id. at 8-9. Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction over the Petition as it concerns relief that Petitioner seeks challenging his continued detention. Kong v. United States, 62 F.4th 608, 614 (1st Cir. 2023) (noting that "we have held that district courts retain jurisdiction over challenges to the legality of detention in the immigration context").Consistent with this Court's prior rulings, including and not limited to Da Silva v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-12672, 2025 WL 2969163, at *2 (D. Mass. Oct. 21, 2025), and Dias de Carvalho v. Hyde, 25-cv-12677-DJC (D. Mass. Nov. 4, 2025), D. 14, the Court agrees with Petitioner that his custody is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (which allows for discretionary determinations of custody before an immigration judge) and not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) (which provides for mandatory detention for "applicants for admission"), as Respondents contend, see D. 7 at 1 n.2; see also Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 289 (2018) (discussing the distinction). As alleged, Petitioner was already residing in the United States before ICE detained him. D. 1 ¶¶ 1, 16, 27, 34. Respondents submit that this Court's decision in Dias de Carvalho is likely dispositive here. See D. 7 at 1. Thus, the Court concludes that Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes as follows. The Court ALLOWS the Petition, D. 1, insofar as it sought a bond hearing/individualized custody redetermination under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial. (SEC) (Entered: 12/05/2025)

Dec 05, 2025

Order

#9

Dec 12, 2025

Status Report

#10

Dec 22, 2025

Order Dismissing Case